Schumer Erin M, Zoeller Keith A, Linsky Paul L, Monreal Gretel, Choi Young, Giridharan Guruprasad A, Sobieski Michael A, Slaughter Mark S, van Berkel Victor H
Department of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Surgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
Department of Bioengineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky.
Ann Thorac Surg. 2015 Jun;99(6):1961-7; discussion 1967-8. doi: 10.1016/j.athoracsur.2015.02.087. Epub 2015 Apr 25.
Ex vivo lung perfusion (EVLP) has the potential to increase the donor pool for lung transplantation by facilitating resuscitation and extended evaluation of marginal organs. Current EVLP methodology employs continuous flow (CF) pumps that produce non-pulsatile EVLP hemodynamics. In this feasibility study, we tested the hypothesis that a pulsatile flow (PF) pump will provide better EVLP support than a CF pump through delivery of physiologic hemodynamics.
Porcine lungs were supported in an EVLP model by centrifugal CF (n = 3) or PF (n = 4) left ventricular assist devices. Lungs were ventilated at 4 to 5 mL/kg, 0.21 fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2), and perfused with an acellular, albumin-based solution corrected for osmolarity, acid-base balance, and carbon dioxide pressure (≤20 hours at 30°C) for a minimum of 12 hours support. Prostaglandin E1 and 30% albumin were infused continuously. Hemodynamic, respiratory, and blood gas parameters were continuously monitored and digitally recorded hourly. Parenchymal biopsies were used for quantification of wet to dry weight ratio.
All lungs maintained function in the EVLP circuit for a minimum of 12 hours (mean 14.7 ± 1 hours) and demonstrated minimal edema formation. The PF EVLP produced higher pulsatility as demonstrated by greater energy equivalent pressure and surplus hemodynamic energy compared with CF EVLP (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in pulmonary impedance, arterial partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen, wet to dry weight ratio, and peak airway pressure between CF and PF EVLP.
The CF and PF EVLP systems successfully maintained lungs 12+ hours using a modified Steen perfusate (XVIVO Perfusion, Inc, Goteborg, Sweden); however, there were no statistically significant differences between CF and PF groups despite higher pulsatility, suggesting that PF may not offer immediate benefits over CF for prolonged ex vivo lung preservation.
体外肺灌注(EVLP)通过促进边缘器官的复苏和延长评估,有可能增加肺移植的供体库。当前的EVLP方法采用连续流(CF)泵,产生非搏动性的EVLP血流动力学。在这项可行性研究中,我们测试了这样一个假设,即搏动流(PF)泵通过提供生理性血流动力学,将比CF泵提供更好的EVLP支持。
在EVLP模型中,用离心式CF(n = 3)或PF(n = 4)左心室辅助装置支持猪肺。肺以4至5 mL/kg、吸入氧分数(FiO2)为0.21进行通气,并用经渗透压、酸碱平衡和二氧化碳压力校正的无细胞、基于白蛋白的溶液灌注(30°C下≤20小时),以提供至少12小时的支持。持续输注前列腺素E1和30%白蛋白。每小时连续监测并数字记录血流动力学、呼吸和血气参数。实质活检用于定量湿重与干重之比。
所有肺在EVLP回路中至少维持功能12小时(平均14.7±1小时),且水肿形成最小。与CF EVLP相比,PF EVLP产生了更高的搏动性,表现为更高的能量等效压力和剩余血流动力学能量(p < 0.05)。CF和PF EVLP之间在肺阻抗、动脉血氧分压/吸入氧分数、湿重与干重之比以及气道峰值压力方面无统计学显著差异。
CF和PF EVLP系统使用改良的Steen灌注液(XVIVO Perfusion公司,瑞典哥德堡)成功维持肺12小时以上;然而,尽管PF具有更高的搏动性,但CF组和PF组之间无统计学显著差异,这表明在延长的体外肺保存方面,PF可能不会比CF带来直接益处。